While he might be concerned, it's not Nique who's the one who needs to change there. It's the idiots throwing tomatoes at her who should stop.

While there's always the idea of going to a more receptive audience, after a while (see tumblr) it tends to turn into a big circlejerk, and the idea of feminism is to spread it through society, not end up just preaching to the crowd.

Plus this isn't the 1600s, it's discouraged to throw shit at people you don't agree with.

But Monique DOES need to change. People are allowed to express their displeasure with something and she is purposely doing something to rile up her targets. It was like this story I read about some kind of kinetic artist from Australia a few years back. He dressed himself up like Jesus, stripped himself naked, attached a pulley to himself with a dead cow, and dropped it twenty stories (for what purpose? Your guess is as good as mine). Of course he incited the wrath of all those around him, just as Monique is doing.

Now, stepping away from the odd Jesus/cow example...

She is basically trying to force her beliefs onto people through her act. That is going to be met with resistance, no matter how good/right her beliefs are. It is one thing to believe in what you do, it is quite another to rub it into people's faces and to constantly tell them they are wrong.

Tomatoes still seem a bit harsh to me... I don't throw tomatoes at people I find to be rude and happen to disagree with.

Now again, she still shouldn't snap at Slick, instead she should explain (like, "I shouldn't be assaulted with vegetables for expressing an opinion/world view that is close to my heart"). Of course, she is a human being with faults (and probably has a short temper after the veggie escapade) so I won't be surprised if she does snap at him anyway. Bad moods happen._________________Deviant Art | Twitter | Tumblr

She is basically trying to force her beliefs onto people through her act. That is going to be met with resistance, no matter how good/right her beliefs are. It is one thing to believe in what you do, it is quite another to rub it into people's faces and to constantly tell them they are wrong.

You realize that this is tantamount to saying that no one should speak their mind, but should only do things that other people will appreciate, right? Or do I have the right to go to a Beiber concert and throw shit that I'm not aware of?_________________"Worse comes to worst, my people come first, but my tribe lives on every country on earth. Iíll do anything to protect them from hurt, the human race is what I serve." - Baba Brinkman

Tomatoes still seem a bit harsh to me... I don't throw tomatoes at people I find to be rude and happen to disagree with.

Now again, she still shouldn't snap at Slick, instead she should explain (like, "I shouldn't be assaulted with vegetables for expressing an opinion/world view that is close to my heart"). Of course, she is a human being with faults (and probably has a short temper after the veggie escapade) so I won't be surprised if she does snap at him anyway. Bad moods happen.

Yeah, I do agree with you on that. And Dogen, that is not what I mean to say. There is merely a time and a place for things. AND a certain manner. I do remember a comic where Monique said something along the lines of "It-Girl reporting for duty. Bzzzt! Malfunction!" Then she proceeds to flip off the audience and shouts "F*** you, I do what I want."

Most definitely that would incite some wrath. Somebody said it earlier: "Why doesn't she find a crowd more suited to her opinions?" And that is a good point. Why doesn't she? That is because she is fixated on changing their opinions. Slick, although in a tasteless way, pointed out that of course doing such a thing is going to rile them up.

This is definitely a good comic for defining Monique. Psychologically, I think it kind of humanizes Monique in way. She can't be right about everything all the time.

First off, Slick is definitely in the wrong. Monique, however, should not be surprised by this, 'cuz frankly Slick is acting exactly how you would expect his character to act based upon what we know of him. That doesn't mean his behavior, namely victim blaming, is justifiable or condonable by any measure._________________...if a single leaf holds the eye, it will be as if the remaining leaves were not there.http://about.me/omardrake

And Dogen, that is not what I mean to say. There is merely a time and a place for things. AND a certain manner. I do remember a comic where Monique said something along the lines of "It-Girl reporting for duty. Bzzzt! Malfunction!" Then she proceeds to flip off the audience and shouts "F*** you, I do what I want."

Most definitely that would incite some wrath. Somebody said it earlier: "Why doesn't she find a crowd more suited to her opinions?" And that is a good point. Why doesn't she? That is because she is fixated on changing their opinions. Slick, although in a tasteless way, pointed out that of course doing such a thing is going to rile them up.

You seem to be assuming a lot about her here. Where does she perform that only anti-feminists seem to be? Is she a scheduled performer, where people should be able to tell beforehand what they're getting into (a la Daniel Tosh)? It seems weird that you assume answers to these questions, even though we don't actually know them. Further, who the fuck cares if she riles them up? If you throw a thing at another human being outside the confines of a sport or game you're wrong 100% of the time.

Anyway, it could easily be seen as allegory for the response to feminism experienced in everyday life, wherein we don't get to choose our audience. I know I've used the term off hand a few times and gotten the side-eye from people, or scoffed at, like I just said I eat bald eagle eggs. That's a little more meta than I typically get with these comics, though._________________"Worse comes to worst, my people come first, but my tribe lives on every country on earth. Iíll do anything to protect them from hurt, the human race is what I serve." - Baba Brinkman

First off, Slick is definitely in the wrong. Monique, however, should not be surprised by this, 'cuz frankly Slick is acting exactly how you would expect his character to act based upon what we know of him. That doesn't mean his behavior, namely victim blaming, is justifiable or condonable by any measure.

But he's acting compassionate. He sympathizes with her position. He even separates himself genuinely by referring to the hecklers as "you know how THEY get". And his advice is right. Unless Monique is ready to fight those battles, she shouldn't be seeking trouble when she can avoid it.

And Dogen, that is not what I mean to say. There is merely a time and a place for things. AND a certain manner. I do remember a comic where Monique said something along the lines of "It-Girl reporting for duty. Bzzzt! Malfunction!" Then she proceeds to flip off the audience and shouts "F*** you, I do what I want."

Most definitely that would incite some wrath. Somebody said it earlier: "Why doesn't she find a crowd more suited to her opinions?" And that is a good point. Why doesn't she? That is because she is fixated on changing their opinions. Slick, although in a tasteless way, pointed out that of course doing such a thing is going to rile them up.

You seem to be assuming a lot about her here. Where does she perform that only anti-feminists seem to be? Is she a scheduled performer, where people should be able to tell beforehand what they're getting into (a la Daniel Tosh)? It seems weird that you assume answers to these questions, even though we don't actually know them. Further, who the fuck cares if she riles them up? If you throw a thing at another human being outside the confines of a sport or game you're wrong 100% of the time.

Anyway, it could easily be seen as allegory for the response to feminism experienced in everyday life, wherein we don't get to choose our audience. I know I've used the term off hand a few times and gotten the side-eye from people, or scoffed at, like I just said I eat bald eagle eggs. That's a little more meta than I typically get with these comics, though.

I know what you mean. I mean, I got scoffs for my beliefs and how I view things. But to your earlier questions, these are things that we can infer. I mean, she has always been the target of tomatoes. And we can tell by the crowd's responses of "we want the old Monique back" that she is still playing to the same crowd that she did with her old persona. Not to mention that if she was playing to a feminist crowd she wouldn't be as defiant. For those reasons I deduce that she is playing to a largely anti-feminist crowd. Not to mention that the anti-feminist crowd seems to represent the readers who don't like the "feminist" story arc.

First off, Slick is definitely in the wrong. Monique, however, should not be surprised by this, 'cuz frankly Slick is acting exactly how you would expect his character to act based upon what we know of him. That doesn't mean his behavior, namely victim blaming, is justifiable or condonable by any measure.

But he's acting compassionate. He sympathizes with her position. He even separates himself genuinely by referring to the hecklers as "you know how THEY get". And his advice is right. Unless Monique is ready to fight those battles, she shouldn't be seeking trouble when she can avoid it.

Um, yeah, you just described a "nice guy" (and that's not a good thing)_________________...if a single leaf holds the eye, it will be as if the remaining leaves were not there.http://about.me/omardrake

Isn't a nice guy basically someone who says what the girl wants to hear so he can get some? Or he keeps doing them favors in hopes of it being repaid by sex? How is he being a nice guy in THIS sense? I just see it as a friend trying to help out a friend.

I mean, if he was trying to get into her pants he'd be insincerely talking trash about the hecklers, not warning her to avoid agitating them.

But Monique DOES need to change. People are allowed to express their displeasure with something and she is purposely doing something to rile up her targets. It was like this story I read about some kind of kinetic artist from Australia a few years back. He dressed himself up like Jesus, stripped himself naked, attached a pulley to himself with a dead cow, and dropped it twenty stories (for what purpose? Your guess is as good as mine). Of course he incited the wrath of all those around him, just as Monique is doing.

She is basically trying to force her beliefs onto people through her act. That is going to be met with resistance, no matter how good/right her beliefs are. It is one thing to believe in what you do, it is quite another to rub it into people's faces and to constantly tell them they are wrong.

You're kind of doing exactly what the comic is talking about, victim blaming. Monique isn't "purposely trying to rile up her targets." She is using a public platform to express her own beliefs to those listening. The reaction of the crowd, i.e. physical violence against Monique, is the fault of the actual crowd.

She isn't the one who needs to change here.

This was largely the point of the comic.

Last edited by lol on Wed Mar 06, 2013 9:36 am; edited 1 time in total

I would react the same as Nique. It's basically saying "The tomato throwers can't help being who they are!" Except yes they can and it's unfair that they get defended despite being the bullies. "You shouldn't do that" will always be a victim blaming sentence if said to the victim. If the tomato throwers were decent guys, they'd simply stop coming to her shows, not throw crap at her.

Slick thinks he's trying to be sympathetic but he's not. A friend shouldn't try to force restrictions onto someone, especially if it's something they love doing. He should instead be trying to find ways to stop the tomato throwers, by suggesting getting security guards at the door or otherwise.

Enforcing victim blaming by saying it's their fault for getting into trouble only leads to people being afraid of being themselves. Do you think you could be proud in knowing that you helped in your friend's unhappiness?_________________

But Monique DOES need to change. People are allowed to express their displeasure with something and she is purposely doing something to rile up her targets. It was like this story I read about some kind of kinetic artist from Australia a few years back. He dressed himself up like Jesus, stripped himself naked, attached a pulley to himself with a dead cow, and dropped it twenty stories (for what purpose? Your guess is as good as mine). Of course he incited the wrath of all those around him, just as Monique is doing.

She is basically trying to force her beliefs onto people through her act. That is going to be met with resistance, no matter how good/right her beliefs are. It is one thing to believe in what you do, it is quite another to rub it into people's faces and to constantly tell them they are wrong.

You're kind of doing exactly what the comic is talking about, victim blaming. Monique isn't "purposely trying to rile up her targets." She is using a public platform to express her own beliefs to those listening. The reaction of the crowd, i.e. physical violence against Monique, is the fault of the actual crowd.

She isn't the one who needs to change here.

This was largely the point of the comic.

But yes she was trying to purposely rile them up. I referenced a comic earlier where she shouted to the crowd "F*** you, I do what I want."

The crowds reaction is a rude one, and that is most certainly true. However, she goes there, time after time. In fact, she trains and prepares for the resistance she is about to face. In this most recent one she bought a lacross stick to RETALIATE. So, she GOES into these situations, KNOWING she is going to encounter resistance.

So, Slick, seeing that the treatment of the crowd is what gets her upset, puts it forth as: "Shouldn't rile 'em up like that. You know how they get." Monique knew what she is expecting. Slick just pointed out the obvious.

First off, Slick is definitely in the wrong. Monique, however, should not be surprised by this, 'cuz frankly Slick is acting exactly how you would expect his character to act based upon what we know of him. That doesn't mean his behavior, namely victim blaming, is justifiable or condonable by any measure.

i'm not sure if we can comment on whether of not slick is in the wrong here because i'm not sure of the exact meaning of his words, inflection means a lot... one thing i think we can say though is that its not enough to brand this as victim blaming. in some situations it is known that a certain action is likely to bring about a certain response, if you jump into the tiger cage they're probably going to eat you. if you try to explain equality and feminism to incompetents and dudebros it's likely that you'll get heckled. is she at fault? no. is she a bit stupid for knowing the likely results of her actions beforehand and still deciding to go through with them? pretty much... if the people won't change and she continues to try the same tired methods... well, a certain definition of insanity comes to mind. if thats all he meant by it then i don't think you can fault him

First off, Slick is definitely in the wrong. Monique, however, should not be surprised by this, 'cuz frankly Slick is acting exactly how you would expect his character to act based upon what we know of him. That doesn't mean his behavior, namely victim blaming, is justifiable or condonable by any measure.

i'm not sure if we can comment on whether of not slick is in the wrong here because i'm not sure of the exact meaning of his words, inflection means a lot... one thing i think we can say though is that its not enough to brand this as victim blaming. in some situations it is known that a certain action is likely to bring about a certain response, if you jump into the tiger cage they're probably going to eat you. if you try to explain equality and feminism to incompetents and dudebros it's likely that you'll get heckled. is she at fault? no. is she a bit stupid for knowing the likely results of her actions beforehand and still deciding to go through with them? pretty much... if the people won't change and she continues to try the same tired methods... well, a certain definition of insanity comes to mind. if thats all he meant by it then i don't think you can fault him

*shields up, brace for return fire*

Thank you sir. This is my point. I hope that me agreeing with you doesn't get you in trouble. O_O But honestly, everyone here has been pretty civil and cool about it so far. It's really not much of consequence. I wonder if Tat reads these comments and thinks, "Oh, hey! That is a unique look on things."

I don't think he really intends to do such deep suggestions. It either comes out naturally in his writing or it is just the multiple interpretations of the people here. In thinking about it, I never really gave the deeper nature of this comic much thought until I started discussing and reading things here.

And I have admitted it. I am a huge Slick fan, and I am an even bigger fan of his growing (yet still very small) redemptive side.

P.S. And his inflection was something I did notice, and it was the reason why I said earlier that his comment was distasteful.